quote:

... what I would NEVER do, however, is to allow anyone, to put a BIG! signature on my guitars!!.....
Luthier signature -on the label inside - has to be the only one!

quote:

who does Paco have? other than the self proclaimed barefooted guitarist/maker of the previous previous guitar rumbaking had.
just wondering.

quote:

what I would NEVER do, however, is to allow anyone, to put a BIG! signature on my guitars!!.....
Luthier signature -on the label inside - has to be the only one! IMO
:-)

quote:

when/where is the Oakland concert?

quote:


why is that? I heard someone else sayign that before, he never explained

quote:

well,
for my case I think it's connected to my work ... (Architect) ... it is perhaps due in particular to the restoration of old churches (inside which often are pipe organs, antique paintings or sculptures ecc).
I have always found the signatures of the Master Builders or Restorers of the past, hidden in some remote places of the opera.

This kind of discretion, concerning the presence of a signature on an opera ( an architecture, a painting, a sculpture or other artistical things) has always fascinated me ... as well as old Italian artistical furniture Masters who signed their creations in the hidden parts of it!, never well visible!

A BIG signature clearly visible on a work of art, like a Luthier guitar, is to me a kind of "outrage" to the artistic uniqueness of the guitar.

I do not tolerate the presence of any other distinguishing feature on the guitar (in this case the signature of a master guitarist) because it reduces the "presence" of the Luthier and Me as the ONLY TWO subjects involved in the “essence” of the life of the instrument related to myself.

Also there is the purely aesthetic, which I think must be respected in order to leave the original look of the guitar that, IMO, has to remain "authentic" over the years.

To allow others to sign a guitar is to me … just the modern (distorted) way to have an emotional relationship with our musical idols.

To me, it makes sense that a master guitar player signs his CD ... but certainly not the guitar that I play! ... even if I would like to play his best pieces.
:-) ciao,
giambattista

quote:

About 5 or 6 days only...

quote:

well,
for my case I think it's connected to my work ... (Architect) ... it is perhaps due in particular to the restoration of old churches (inside which often are pipe organs, antique paintings or sculptures ecc).
I have always found the signatures of the Master Builders or Restorers of the past, hidden in some remote places of the opera.

This kind of discretion, concerning the presence of a signature on an opera ( an architecture, a painting, a sculpture or other artistical things) has always fascinated me ... as well as old Italian artistical furniture Masters who signed their creations in the hidden parts of it!, never well visible!

A BIG signature clearly visible on a work of art, like a Luthier guitar, is to me a kind of "outrage" to the artistic uniqueness of the guitar.

I do not tolerate the presence of any other distinguishing feature on the guitar (in this case the signature of a master guitarist) because it reduces the "presence" of the Luthier and Me as the ONLY TWO subjects involved in the “essence” of the life of the instrument related to myself.

Also there is the purely aesthetic, which I think must be respected in order to leave the original look of the guitar that, IMO, has to remain "authentic" over the years.

To allow others to sign a guitar is to me … just the modern (distorted) way to have an emotional relationship with our musical idols.

To me, it makes sense that a master guitar player signs his CD ... but certainly not the guitar that I play! ... even if I would like to play his best pieces.
:-) ciao,
giambattista

quote:

Masters who signed their creations in the hidden parts of it!, never well visible!

A BIG signature clearly visible on a work of art, like a Luthier guitar, is to me a kind of "outrage" to the artistic uniqueness of the guitar.

I do not tolerate the presence of any other distinguishing feature on the guitar (in this case the signature of a master guitarist) because it reduces the "presence" of the Luthier and Me as the ONLY TWO subjects involved in the “essence” of the life of the instrument related to myself.

Also there is the purely aesthetic, which I think must be respected in order to leave the original look of the guitar that, IMO, has to remain "authentic" over the years.

quote:

so are you Ok if paco signed the back of the guitar which NO one will see? in the case, no one will see it, and when you playing it, no one will see it because its on your chest basically! what do you think?
besides, dont you think his signature looks artistic too?

quote:

what I would NEVER do, however, is to allow anyone, to put a BIG! signature on my guitars!!

quote:

Rumbaking...ignore all the jealous comments man!!